I think there is a point to the discussion. Whether it is men that build bridges or women makes no difference so long as the bridge does the job. If there is a large imbalance in the industry then surely it will have an effect on what gets published. I’m sure women will understand what’s marketable as much as men however it’s difficult not to allow personal taste in judgement. Both sexes are human. I suggest that if you had put a book like Trainspotting or Clockwork Orange before they were published, in front of 20 female agents and 20 male then there would be a higher rejection rate from the female agents. Of course that is just my opinion, but I’m suggesting that taste and sensitivity will come into selection, and male and female tastes and sensitivities are different.
But apparently more men than women are getting published. (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/books-and-arts/82930/VIDA-women-writers-magazines-book-reviews) So assuming you're correct that there are differences in "tastes and sensitivities", which I don't think I automatically agree with but don't feel the need to discuss, it doesn't seem to be hurting male authors. And male readers? They only buy 20% of the fiction sold each year (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14175229). So if there IS a connection between gender and the books editors select, and if there's a connection between the gender of the author and the gender of the reader, I'd say we either need more female editors, or we need to tell them to stop publishing so many books by men. Why are men so over-represented in the industry when they're such a small part of the readership?
@BayView - are you suggesting that male writers are only read by male readers? Because that clearly is not so, otherwise this would not be the case: As for whether books, films and music are better now than 50 years ago, it's a pointless exercise. Which books and films? The most popular? The most critically acclaimed? Or the mean of some arbitrary standard (like the Poetry graph in "Dead Poets Society")? Moreover, by whose judgment?
It seems to me that plenty of women enjoy books written by men. Amongst readers in genres which appeal to both genders such as crime, fantasy, thrillers etc, I don't think the gender of the writer matters too much to the reader, (admidtedly based on the relatively small number of female readers I know) so female agents and editors shouldn't have much bias to male or female writers.
Looking back at my most recent (and current) reads, I see: In the Name of Salome - Julia Alvarez Old Yeller - Fred Gipson The Orphan Train - Christina Baker Kline (twice) Expo 58 - Jonathan Coe The Nightingale - Kristin Hannah Everything I Never Told You - Celeste Ng All the Light We Cannot See - Anthony Doerr That's 62.5% female, 37.5% male.
I’ve read before that there are more male authors than female. I don’t understand why that should be the case and wonder if that will continue. A good book is a good book whatever skin colour, religion or sex of the writer. Surely, we are long since past the point where women need to adopt a male pseudonym. For me the sex of the writer plays no part in my selection of book to read. @BayView (Ed) - I didn’t get the impression you were suggesting male readers only read male authors. I started the thread as a general question that occurred to me after seeing that the 22 editors involved in the P2P competition are all female. I can see that being an editor is a job that can be done at home while raising a family, and perhaps that’s how all female editors in the comp. has come about. And while there did seem to be a preference for fantasy and romance (I need to double-check that), perhaps my entry will stand out for not being either of those -when fantasy seems so popular for new writers. Having had a go at Nano a couple of times, I get the impression that there are more female than male participants. It would be interesting to see a statistic. I’ve just done a quick check of the member of the Crime Writing group (640) and around 55% were male. Back to the thread – does the higher number of females in publishing affect what gets through, not related to the sex of the author, but the grittiness of the material.
I did read an article not too long ago about the entertainment industry and how "female influence" ( I can't remember if he was referring to female consumers , female producers, or both) has changed what we see in theatres and television. More fantasy and YA type media. I can find the article if you're interested.
My thoughts are that something as general as "grittiness," as a quality of any given writing, would not dissuade any agent -- aside from particular genres -- to not appraise the otherwise present merits of its marketability. I thought agents are pretty up front about what genres they deal with. If those 22 just do YA/Romance, or they're on a contest panel, save the work for another contest. I'd just research what genre those 22 actually focus on. Nobody calls gritty film or music guy stuff.
Possibly the trend for more gritty fantasy these days is down to more females in the industry. The good guys being in the right and vanquishing the bad guys who are in the wrong may appeal more towards certain male escapist desires, while the gritty, greyer morality has an appeal to groups in both genders. It's an interesting theory, though I suspect the trend to gritty caused by the massive success of Game of Thrones has dwarfed any gender effect either way.
You read that agents want to see something different, something that stands out - but if you write something different, it can't be too different can it? I've looked at the 22 editors in the comp again and while YA and Romance are the most commonly preferred, there are a few who want other stories. Even one asking for darker material and another for grotesque (uh?). I didn't start out with an answer to my question in my head. And thinking about it, even fantasy YA stories seem to be preferred if they are 'darker' these days. I suspect preferences must keep shifting. I haven't got round to reading or watching GOT yet but perhaps you're right about grittier and greyer morality. So, maybe my story that doesn't really have a good guy has a chance - but then a common piece of advice seems to be to give readers someone to side with. Oh well, not changing it now.
*Electronically throws hands up in air* I think your argument sucks. Good art should come to the fore. Not have to be found. This should not be the norm. Why should we have to wade through utter dribble to find something genius? Taylor swift and one direction compared to da Vinci and Picasso? Really? Ps finding stuff on Internet doesn't make you a connoisseur. My apologies on your advertising point I didn't realise 'grey' was a kids book. It must be though, since they advertise it. And they only advertise to kids. It is exactly up to the media to show me what good art is. I'm a consumer, that that is the point of their existance. The industry should be blamed for the state of things, and is probably why that kid is still in Kentucky. Apply your logic to any other industry (schools/hospitals/manufacturers) and you are saying it is ok for them to under perform, that we should just accept what they give us, ask no questions, blame no one. And on the gender issue. I think it has nothing to do with anything. As long as the best people for the job have the jobs, and those applying for the jobs have equal opportunities then who cares if your colleagues are male or female?
Its more than that. I don't want to hear that talented kid from Kentucky, who can only afford to make maybe one decent album in his garage, and never go much further. I want new Bruce Springsteens. New Led Zeppelins. Not some underground underdeveloped crap that never gets the patronage art needs.
What's wrong with kids in garages? Me, I enjoy obscure types, two albums, the wife in prison. Not rock legends, they go strange once celebrity bites. I remember watching Jagger at Glastonbury, taking himself very seriously with his sympathy for the devil, old chap, no evolution whatsoever. Also, with a guitarist in the house - he points out to me that all my rock guitarists are not actually any good at all, even the Jimmy Page. Currently I reflect on this issue. I like my publishers ravishing, female, powerful and deadly or male and sympathetic to worm poets, currently even in last place on the WF forum. [hypothetical]
Springsteen? Anything after The River is crap These new artists are out there. You're not going to find them on the radio, but it is easier now than ever for these guys in their garage to make music and get it out to the world.
OK... Not even going to reply to that Springsteen comment. I hear about these "new artists." I can even name a few. Perfume Genius. Great artist. Good songs and amazing for recordings straight from the garage. But it lacks the magic of talented artists who are given the limelight. Prince, Sinatra, Springsteen, etc. These would be talents today, the ones stuck in their garages, never evolve to the kind of heights we used to see. It's the same thing with low budget films. I can name some great indie stuff, but when you combine quality script and acting with a big budget, it's usually better.
There used to be fewer outlets and less fragmentation of audience. The ones you saw rose to greater heights, but how many more did we never see at all?
What do folks think the gender ratio is in - if there is such a thing - the "literary canon"? (And does the question-mark go inside or outside? Sorry.) I mean like, think of "the most important" works of fiction in the last 100 years -- mostly men? Women? Obviously 100 years ago it was men, but 50 years ago did it start to balance out? When and why? 20 years ago? Today? I'm interesting in how and why these shifts are happening.
I took one and a half English lit courses in college, and as far as I understand the term 'canon,' even if all admitted to the canon, as works discussed by academic journals, taught regularly, etc., were women, it wouldn't make hardly any difference in the past 50 years. I don't even think parity exists in poetry as far as I see it.
To an extent. Seems to me there is a lot of quality that you're going to have to go looking for these days. It seems like a net gain. The artists that would have made it in the 1970s are still going to be there, but a lot who you'd never have heard a peep from are going to be available if you seek them out. But in today's pop music environment, I don't think a band like Blood Ceremony (just to pick an example) stands a chance without the opening up of digital media and easy access to indie music.
All these questions seem pointless to me; about why and what it's doing to the industry and shit. What are you going to do about it right now? Are you going to wake up tomorrow and go, "God damn, I really need to do something about that female-male ratio in the publishing industry," or instead are you just going to go on with your day and go grocery shop and to work like every other day and forget about this except only when you're on this forum? That's what I'm going to do. I bet most of you, like me, didn't even know this was happening until you read this thread and now suddenly it concerns you and you want to know why and if it's making a difference? The original question was, "Is there enough men in the publishing industry?" Considering there's only 15% I would say no. That's the obvious answer. Why even have this discussion or post it on a thread when the answer is so obvious? Why did the OP not just hold this question to himself and move on with his day? Why did he or she have to post it? Because I think the real question is, "Does it fucking matter?" And I'm saying it doesn't because I don't believe in gender inequality. I am a man and sometimes I think about being a woman and if I were to make that transition I would hope that people would not judge my tastes and quality in something because I was a man or a woman but because of my intelligence.
I think you've made it pretty clear that you don't care - so stop reading the thread, and stop posting in it. If you're only interested in things that affect your grocery shopping, go read a recipe site somewhere. And if you ARE going to stay on the thread, maybe try to pay closer attention. Nobody here has said that only 15% of the publishing industry employees are male. The number was from 15 years ago, and it was 15% of employees with less than 3 years experience - that's a pretty small subset of the larger group "employees".